Juvenile Transfer to the Criminal Justice System

The rise of violent juvenile crime in the recent past has called for a more punitive response by the criminal justice system. For example, it is no longer even discussed whether certain juveniles will be prosecuted in the adult system, because automatic forms of juvenile transfer have increased during the current “get tough” phase. This approach toward the adjudication of juveniles is used to address serious or chronic adolescents (Sellers, 2009). Unfortunately, relying on automatic waivers has caused a number of processing, correctional and recidivism issues. However, perhaps the largest concern is that juveniles are not developmentally or emotionally capable of being processed and treated as an adult. Investigators have shown how developmental immaturity negatively affects a waived juvenile’s ability to be deemed ‘fit for trial’ in the adult legal system (Sellers, 2009).

Nearly 200,000 juveniles are tried as adults each year, and approximately 12% of these adolescents are younger than sixteen (Sellers, 2009). The legal ability to adjudicate youths in the criminal justice system is the waiver process; three waiver forms exist. The judicial waiver allows the judge to review the evidence regarding the youth’s willingness to participate in treatment and his potential threat to society. Usually, this decision is made using the seriousness of the offense and the individual’s criminal history as major factors. The legislative offense exclusion, or statutory waiver, allows legislatures to create laws and policies regarding the juvenile justice system. This approach is the simplest way to emphasize the seriousness of the crime and to promote a retributive focus (Sellers, 2009). The last strategy is the prosecutorial waiver, or “direct file.” Using this approach, the prosecutor is granted the discretion to choose whether a youth is charged in criminal or juvenile court. Judicial waivers allow for a hearing to determine the adolescent’s maturity level, amenability to treatment and potential danger to society. However, statutory and prosecutorial waivers do no evaluate these factors; a mandatory waiver requires only that there is probable cause to prosecute. New statutory waiver laws enacted in 1994 increased the number of juveniles automatically transferred to criminal by 73% (Sellers, 2009). This is problematic to say the least, because statutory exclusion laws force juveniles into the adult system, exposing them to adult criminal adjudication and punishment without ever evaluating whether the child is capable of fully participating in their proceedings. Characteristics such as psychological maturity, social influences and prior record are all important factors in criminality, and should be considered when deciding how to punish, deter or rehabilitate juveniles (Sellers, 2009). Furthermore, automatic transfers ensure adjudication will rely solely on the offense rather than the offender, effectively eliminating discretion. While it may sound comforting to hear that discretion is reduced, it is actually very dangerous to remove power from the judges and lawyers: laws are written vaguely so that they may be interpreted to fit almost every situation. If discretion is removed, all individuals are treated equally severely. This means that in the eyes of the law, a six year old who hits a friend while roughhousing on the baseball field will receive the same sentence as a teen that violently attacks a rival with a bat. Obviously, it is necessary to consider the circumstances before sentencing.

The use of automatic transfer waivers is based on the rationale that harsher sanctions will serve as a deterrent for future juvenile crime. Unfortunately, statutory exclusion laws and direct-file statures have been found to provide no significant or lasting deterrent for juvenile crime (Sellers, 2009). In fact, New York...

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

...Should Juvenile Offenders Be Tried As Adults? A Developmental Perspective on Changing Legal Policies
Laurence Steinberg
Temple University and The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and JuvenileJustice
Paper presented as a part of a Congressional Research Briefing entitled “Juvenile Crime: Causes and Consequences,” Washington, January 19, 2000. Address correspondence to the author at the Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, or at lds@vm.temple.edu.
1
I'd like to talk today about recent changes in juvenilejustice policy that are being implemented despite a full consideration of what research on child development has to say about the wisdom of these changes. The changes that I am referring to are those that are resulting in more and more juvenile offenders being prosecuted and sentenced as if they were adults. I am interested in this both as someone who studies adolescent development and as the Director of the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Adolescent Development and JuvenileJustice. This is a national initiative examining how knowledge about adolescent development can inform policy-making and practice in the justicesystem. Let me say a few words about the Network and its current activities. Let me frame the...

...﻿Austyn Ker
Juvenile Crime
WR121
Tim Black
Fall 2014
Rough Draft
In today’s day and age, we are constantly reminded of the problems with juvenile crimes and their punishments. The increases in levels of juvenile crimes are becoming a national concern. I believe that as a nation, American citizens focus more on the punishment of juveniles, and less on the cause, as well as prevention and intervention. It is important that we understand these things in order to help us succeed in preventing future crimes.
Juveniles in the United States who are involved with the law are generally treated differently that adults. However, that can change based on the severity of the crime. Every state has their own separate court system for juveniles, and each juvenile court handles two different groups of juveniles; delinquent offenders and status offenders. A delinquent offender is one who has committed an “adult” crime, such as murder. Status offenders, on the other hand, are children who are considered to unruly or out of control. Status offences aren’t crimes, but they are acts that are only considered illegal if a minor commits them. These acts include running away, skipping school, or drinking alcohol.
Much of the US population believes that the parents or guardians should be held accountable for the crimes that their child commits. They believe that it...

...﻿
Crime and the CriminalJusticeSystem
Monica Mois
Introduction to CriminalJustice/CJS/201
November 10, 2014
Christle Sheppard Southall
CriminalJusticeSystem
According to the University of Phoenix CJi Interactive activities (2014), the definition of a crime is “a conduct in violation of the criminal laws of the state, the federal government, or a local jurisdiction, for which there is no legally acceptable justification or excuse”. It is a complex and very difficult definition to agree upon because there are many points of view and controversies in defining what crime is. From a psychological standpoint, it suggest that the crime is a way of expressing the inability of an individual to follow the social norm. The psychological view does not care about the traditional elements of crime. When one individual doesn’t respond appropriately or effectively to the environmentally demands, then the individual is a criminal or maladaptive. The sociological standpoint, suggests that the concept of crime should include many behaviors that are not well defined by laws or the political process. From its sociological point of view, crime is an act that is antisocial and needs to be repressed to maintain society.
There are two most common models most common models of how society determines which acts are criminal. One is the...

...﻿Running head: JUVENILEJUSTICE 1
JuvenileJustice
Valarie Murphy-Taylor
CRJ 301
Timothy Koester
February 18, 2013
JUSTICE 2
Juvenilejustice was created in the late 1800’s as reform to U.S. policies with regards to youth offenders. Over time, through various amendments directed at protecting both the due process rights of youth, and creating an averse effect in relation to jail among youth offenders, juvenilejustice created a system similar to that of the adult justicesystem, an alteration from the original intentions of the United States. “The long-standing mission of juvenilejustice has been to correct youthful offenders so that they will neither return to the juvenilejusticesystem nor continue on into the life of an adult criminal” (Bartollas & Miller, 2008, Ch. 16, pg. 352). There has been a number of strategies and interventions tried in order to accomplish these goals either through rehabilitation or justice, but whether or not they have worked, has depended mainly on the circumstances surrounding the victim(s), offenders and the community. In this paper we will discuss the history of the juvenile. We will also discuss the best strategies...

...﻿
JuvenileJusticeSystem
Carlos M. Lino Rios
University of Phoenix
CJA/204 - INTRODUCTION TO CRIMINALJUSTICE
March 18, 2013
David Kurylowicz, MBA
JuvenileJusticeSystem
There is a rationale in society that juveniles are still in development state and their
Behavior can be malleable. This means that bad or erratic behavior can be change with appropriate treatment, rehabilitation, and influence by an active community. A juvenile is defined by the law as any person under the age of eighteen.
Juvenile delinquency is consider an illegal act or offense committed by an underage person that if the person were an adult it would have been considered a crime. Because of this distinction set in place to protect minors; there are juvenile courts and facilities specifically created to manage these juvenile delinquents. The focus of the juvenile court not on the offense itself, but rather it focuses on the offender and on the possible alternatives to assist in the rehabilitation rather than mere punishment. The main goal is to reduce the recidivism rate in juveniles allowing them to re-integrate into society (JuvenileJustice. 2013).
Offenses can fluctuate from status offenses, to property crimes, and violent crimes. Status offenses are...

...The JuvenileJusticeSystem
Jodia M Murphy
Kaplan University
CJ150 Juvenile Delinquency
Professor Thomas Woods
July 31, 2012
Abstract
This paper takes a brief look at the history and evolution of the juvenilejusticesystem in the United States. In recent years there has been an increase of juvenile cases being transferred into the adult court system. This paper will also look at that process and the consequences of that trend.
History and Evolution
In the early nineteenth century juveniles were treated the same as adults when it came to the legal system. We did not have separate courts or jails for juveniles and they would often receive the same punishments as adults that had committed crimes. “At the beginning of the nineteenth century, delinquent, neglected, and runaway children in the United States were treated in the same way as adult criminal offenders” (Seigel &amp; Welsh, 2011). Three key things that helped to develop a separate system for juveniles were the child-saving movement, the concept of parens patria and the creation of institutions created specifically for the care of juveniles.
The ‘child-savers’ movement began in New York in the early 1800’s. These early groups were concerned mainly with the moral education of...

...The juvenilejusticesystem was founded on the concept of
rehabilitation through individualized justice
Early in U.S. history, children who broke the law were treated the same as adult
criminals
Throughout the late 18th century, "infants" below the age of reason (traditionally
age 7) were presumed to be incapable of criminal intent and were, therefore,
exempt from prosecution and punishment. Children as young as 7, however, could
stand trial in criminal court for offenses committed and, if found guilty, could be
sentenced to prison or even to death.
The 19th-century movement that led to the establishment of the juvenile court in
the U.S. had its roots in 16th-century European educational reform movements.
These earlier reform movements changed the perception of children from one of
miniature adults to one of persons with less than fully developed moral and
cognitive capacities.
John Augustus—planting the seeds of juvenile probation
(1847)
"I bailed nineteen boys, from 7 to 15 years of age, and in
bailing them it was understood, and agreed by the court, that
their cases should be continued from term to term for several
months, as a season of probation; thus each month at the
calling of the docket, I would appear in court, make my report,
and thus the cases would pass on for 5 or 6 months. At the
expiration of this term, twelve of the boys were...

...JuvenileJustice
Developed by Roberta J. Ching
MODULE: STUDENT VERSION
Reading Selections for This Module:
Garinger, Gail. “Juveniles Don’t Deserve Life Sentences.” New York Times 15 Mar. 2012, New York
ed.: A35. Print.
Jenkins, Jennifer Bishop. “On Punishment and Teen Killers.” JuvenileJustice Information Exchange.
2 Aug. 2011. Web. 11 June 2012. < http://jjie.org/jennifer-bishop-jenkins-on-punishmentteen-killers/19184>.
Lundstrom, Marjie. “Kids Are Kids—Until They Commit Crimes.” Sacramento Bee 1 Mar. 2001:
A3. Print.
Thompson, Paul. “Startling Finds on Teenage Brains.” Sacramento Bee 25 May 2001: B7. Print.
Additional Reading Selection:
Anderson, Scott. “Greg Ousley Is Sorry for Killing His Parents. Is That Enough?” New
York Times Magazine. 19 July 2012. Web. 11 June 2012. .
Reading Rhetorically
Prereading
Activity 1
Getting Ready to Read
Quickwrite (5 minutes). If you committed a serious crime, do you
think it would be fair for you to be punished the same way an adult
who committed the same crime would be?
Activity 2
Exploring Key Concepts
1. Who is a juvenile? What are some synonyms for “juvenile”?
2. What are the differences between an adult and a juvenile?
Brainstorm a list of qualities that characterize a juvenile but not
an adult.
69
Activity 3
Exploring Key Definitions
Definitions of some...